Posted: 07 Jul 2008 12:37 PM CDT
Video of John McCain supporter, Carly Fiorina, below and found at YouTube URL here.
Anger is still one major factor for some Hillary Clinton supporters as evidenced by the growing number of websites that are springing up from Clinton supporters against Barack Obama. Others quote different reasons such as inexperience, changing positions and mistrust. Some of those disenfranchised voters are planning to vote for John McCain and as a recent report showed, a third planning to just stay home and refusing to vote for Barack Obama.
"Hillraisers" are backers that have raised at least $100,000 for the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Wall Street Journal reports that about two dozen of them are planning to meet with an avid John McCain supporter. A similar meeting occurred last month.
A report from Wall Street Journal (WSJ) today (subscription required) shows that voters are not the only ones still showing anger or willing to consider backing John McCain, not just with votes but with campaign contributions.
The woman that will be meeting with these top Clinton backers is Carly Fiorina, former Hewlett-Packard Co. chief executive and once known as one of the most powerful businesswoman in the United States and shown in the above video explaining her respect and admiration for Hillary Clinton and her reasoning for backing and actively campaigning for John McCain.
While the majority of the 300 top "Hillraisers" have already started contributing and backing Barack Obama, many have not and in a second meeting of its kind this campaign season, the first happening last month, Fiorina will be speaking with them about supporting, contributing and/or campaigning for John McCain.
The McCain campaign is pressing its case with former Clinton donors. Roughly two dozen big Clinton backers are looking to meet soon with Carly Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard Co. chief executive who is avidly supporting Sen. McCain. The idea, said one person familiar with the campaign's plans, is to pluck disaffected independents, and especially women, from the ranks of former Clinton supporters. A similar meeting occurred last month in Ohio between Ms. Fiorina and Clinton supporters, the McCain campaign said.
While the WSJ article shows many reasons why some Clinton donors simply will not support Obama, including the perceived sexism, his aloofness which was complained about even by people that have grudgingly started backing him and anger over how they thought Obama and the media treated Clinton during the primaries, there are groups of prominent Democrats that have gravitated to John McCain for more practical reasons, such as their belief that John McCain has more "judgment, character, courage and principle over politics and partisanship."
Two of those Democrats made headlines recently by taking on the job of co-chairing the New Hampshire Democrats for McCain.
Jim McConaha and Valery Mitchell, husband and wife, both longtime Democrats, and both supporting and actively campaigning for John McCain
McConaha was a former Clinton administration farm official and Mitchell was a member of Kerry's Steering Committee in 2004 and supported Dodd in 2008 and a former organizer of the Democratic Network.
Why is this? Granite State voters put a premium on judgment, character, courage and principle over politics and partisanship. These are precisely the areas in which McCain stands head and shoulders above Obama.
The list of prominent longtime Independent and Democratic supporters and former Democratic politicians that are joining "Citizens For McCain" is growing and with the help of Fiorina and the townhall meetings across the country aimed at disenfranchised Democratic voters, Clinton supporters, Moderate and Independent women voters, it is quite possible that list may continue to grow over the next three months until the general election in November.
The Wall Street Journal also discusses "Hillraisers" that are not planning to back John McCain but are instead joining and creating Political Action Committees geared toward pressuring Obama into giving Clinton "big role in the general-election campaign," and the WSJ claims that also involves "dozens" of those supporters.
Sen. Barack Obama, the presumed Democratic presidential nominee, faces dissent from dozens of top fund-raisers and other supporters of former rival Sen. Hillary Clinton, who are angry over how she was treated during their bruising primary battle and are hesitating to back Sen. Obama.
Before Hillary Clinton suspended her campaign, there was two schools of thought from Democratic supporters.
One of those was that a prolonged primary was good for the party and allowed everyones voice to be heard so that everyone was satisfied and would unite after the battle was over and support the presumptive nominee.
The other school of thought, which showed many reporters of party leaders being worried at the time, was that a prolonged primary battle would become so divisive and cause such bitterly hard feelings from one group of supporters, that it would hurt the eventual presumptive nominee.
There is no way to conclusively judge which of those schools of thought was right or wrong until after the general election.
Political junkies can speculate, they can hope, wish or pray, but like everyone else that is watching this general campaign season, they too will simply have to wait and see what happens.
Posted: 07 Jul 2008 02:35 AM CDT
Remember this guy? He has been the poster child for a group called War Resisters in Canada. I wrote about him previously here.
Glass, for those of you who have already forgotten him (and I am sure that wouldn't sit well with him...lol) fled to Canada from the US army, of which he was a VOLUNTEER recruit,, rather than be shipped back to Iraq. He has been fighting deportation from Canada based on the "illegal war", and the fact that he would be punished by the US military for deserting.
Turns out that Mr Glass has been so busy with public engagements, (oops I mean evading the nasty Americans), that he didn't hear about an important fact. I got a BIG chuckle this week to read that Glass was DISCHARGED from the military just four months into his life as fugitive.
Yes, ABC carried this story last week:
To read the rest of this go to NewsBlaze here.
Cross-posted on Assoluta Tranquillita,
Tanker Bros and MBVD
Posted: 06 Jul 2008 06:19 PM CDT
YouTube URL here.
The "Cocaine" liquid product is made from guarana, a natural 'caffeine' berry from South America, and contains 350 per cent more caffeine than Red Bull, which is an energy drink that also made headlines when it was banned in one high school in Worthing, West Sussex last month.
Redux Beverages made headline news last year after they had to revamp the marketing of their new drink called "Cocaine", to remove references claiming that it was an alternative to the real cocaine" and remove the phrase "liquid cocaine".
The U.S. version of the drink also contains wasabi and cinnamon, which numbs the throat to copy the effect of cocaine for drinkers.
After the Food and Drug Administration reviewed the Redux's claims about their new high powered super potent "Cocaine" drink, which said that it was a legal alternative to the street drug as well as calling it "Speed in a can" and their claims that it would reduce cholesterol, the FDA decided that some changes had to be made to Redux's marketing strategy, especially since Redux claimed that this drink was dietary supplement.
Because of that claim, the FDA made it clear to Redux that they could not legally market the new energy drink as a product that mimics the effects of illegal drugs.
Nor could they claim the drink would reduce cholesterol because the ingredients had not been approved by the FDA.
The company then changed their claims on the official website to say that "The purpose of the beverage is to provide essential sugars, amino acids, caffeine and vitamins useful in supplementing and promoting consumer energy levels."
One state in the U.S., Connecticut, actually threatened to file suit against Redux saying it "dangerously glamorizes drug use."
The Las Vegas-based manufacturer will face legal action if it does not immediately stop selling the high-caffeine drink, Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said in a statement.
Blumenthal continued on to say, "Naming this product 'Cocaine' is an insult to anyone seeking to deter and discourage illegal drug use. The effect is to verbally trample or obscure the true, hard lessons about cocaine -- for profit."
Evidently there was also a problem for the company and this controversially named drink in Texas because according to their website, it says, "No Cocaine in Texas!"
If you live in Texas, you will be unable to buy Cocaine Energy Drink. We have resolved our legal issues with the Texas Attorney General and are wrapping up all of the details. We have no details yet as to if and when Cocaine Energy Drink will return to the state of Texas.
In regards to the problems Redux has had with the FDA, they have a page on their website, listed under the tab "compliance", where it says:
Redux has modified all labeling and marketing to address the compliance issues outlined in the warning letter sent to Redux by the FDA in April of 2007. We will continue to work closely and cooperate with the FDA in accordance with FDA mandates to make sure that all Redux products meet FDA guidelines for compliance. Please address all compliance questions and issues to firstname.lastname@example.orgThese statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.
At the bottom of that page, they provide a copy of the letter that the FDA sent to them, along with their drinks label.
Recent News About "Cocaine".
After complying with the FDA's rules and changing their website and their marketing campaign and despite protests and criticisms from a variety of people and groups "Cocaine" according to their newly-formed United Kingdom parent company Ocke Cokey, will be on the shelves within the next few weeks. It is first expected to be launched in Britain.
A map of distributing locations is already provided on the drinkcocaine.com website.
On the can is the word "Cocaine" in what appears to be a grainy white substance, assumed to deliberately appear as the drug cocaine.
The criticisms and protesting comes from a range of sources, from anti-drug charities saying that the marketing of this drug is "cynical and irresponsible" and claiming this is an attempt by Redux to make drugs more appealing to young people, to the UK National Drug Prevention Alliance, with a spokesmen, David Raynes, saying, 'It is people exploiting drugs. It is a pretty cynical tactic exploiting illegal drugs for their own benefit.
The fact is that subliminally it is making the image of drug use cool and that's what kids want to be, cool. Kids will be drinking Cocaine and will inevitably link the two. The drink is relatively innocuous, but they will be linking it with cocaine use and the market, which is far from innocuous."
Despite the hoops this company has had to jump through and the criticisms and legal actions taken against them, they have shown a strong determination to get this drink back on the shelves and they plan on doing so in the next weeks.
Depending on how the sales go for this controversial new energy drink will probably determine whether you soon see "Cocaine" in stores near you.
Posted: 06 Jul 2008 02:23 PM CDT
The RNC has launched a ten day, $3 million campaign ad, aimed at attacking Barack Obama on his energy stances. The ad launched during the Saturday night baseball games and will be shown in the key swing states of Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
Showing that John McCain and the Republican National Committee plan to make these states a part of their drive to retain the White House in November.
It is a 30-second ad (shown above, called "Balance" and the text is as follows:
"Record gas prices, a climate in crisis. John McCain says solve it now. With a balanced plan — alternative energy, conservation, suspending the gas tax AND more production here at home. He's pushing his own party to face climate change.
"But Barack Obama? For conservation, but he just says no to lower gas taxes. No to nuclear. No to more production. No new solutions. Barack Obama: Just the party line. The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising."
The advertising effort is an attempt to exploit a rare -- and significant -- financial edge for Republicans. At the end of May, the RNC had $53.5 in the bank while the Democratic National Committee had just $3.9 million.
As Hot Air points out, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin are all states the Republicans lost in 2004 and Obama lost Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania to Hillary Clinton during the primaries.
All of these states are suffering financially from a loss of jobs and rising gas and food prices, to which this ad is geared to toward attacking Obama on his stances towards.
This follows the recent ad that the John McCain campaign released at the end of June called Dr. No, showing that McCain and the RNC are focusing on the issue of energy at a time when it is critically important and on the mids of Americans.
They are casting McCain in the light of wanting to make changes, even admitting that he is pushing his own party on the issue of energy, while nicknaming Obama as Dr. No and the candidate that keeps saying no to new ideas as well as thrusting the argument out that Obama is following the party line.
Whether this will work or not remains to be seen but the Obama campaigns initial response, is described as "A stunned skepticism," with one of his spokesmen, Hari Sevugan, saying "What we need to solve our energy crisis is an honest debate about the choices before us, not more attack ads that mislead voters about the facts."
The two ads mentioned above are not the first video ads to come out online with John McCain speaking about energy. It is a topic that it looks like they will be hitting hard on, consistently. The other one was called "Purpose".
The ad is above and the readers can decide for themselves if they think it will be effective or not.
I think it is important to make voters see who is producing ideas, whether we all agree with those ideas or not, and who is simply criticizing ideas without offering something new...other than raising taxes and taking more money from the pockets of people suffering from rising prices already.
|You are subscribed to email updates from Wake up America |
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
|Email Delivery powered by FeedBurner|
|Inbox too full? Subscribe to the feed version of Wake up America in a feed reader.|
|If you prefer to unsubscribe via postal mail, write to: Wake up America, c/o FeedBurner, 20 W Kinzie, 9th Floor, Chicago IL USA 60610|